[Vote] (6-65) Balancing Classical Era UB - Tetraconch

[Hinin]

Currently in this Era we have some very strong building like Burial Tomb, Floating Gardens, Satrap’s Court and Harappan Reservoir.

On the other side we have Runestone and Tetraconch. They are also strong enough compared to ancient era UB but they could be a bit better with little changes.

Bulding	Current	Proposed	Reasoning: the majority of Classical Era UB have 3-5 additional basic yields + some bonuses from other sources.
Tetraconch	+2 Culture +3 Faith. +1 Faith for every 3 Citizens in the City. Contains one slot for the Great work of music. Doubles religious pressure generated by Trade Routes, and generates +25% Religious Pressure. -1 Unhappiness from Religious Unrest	+2 Culture / +4 Faith +1 Faith for every 3 Citizens in the City. 10% of City’s Faith output is added to City’s Culture every turn Contains one slot for the Great work of music. Doubles religious pressure generated by Trade Routes, and generates +25% Religious Pressure. -1 Unhappiness from Religious Unrest	Tetraconch have only + 2 Culture to basic yields and already removed -1 gold from maintenance (totally+3 yields from ordinary temple). All the other bonuses related to Faith. It’s OK, but prerequisite tech is Philosophy. It should be a bit closer to Medieval Era effectiveness. That’s why it’s proposed to make additional profit from Faith by adding 10% to Culture and add +1 Faith to basic yields.

I hope these changes are not for the worse


Database Changes

 

[Hinin]

MAGI - It has been decided to split the proposal (6-64) into two during the poll phase. The Tetraconch part becomes proposal 6-65 and is moved to this thread.

 

[azum4roll]

Tetraconch compared to Temple:

-1 Maintenance
+2 Culture
+1 Faith per 3 Population
+100% Religious Pressure to Cities connected by Trade Routes

I don't think it's bad. The Faith generated is insane, and the pressure is a good bonus.

 

[rkkn]

Tetraconch is just... kinda slow. not a very exciting building. It's too late and slow to build to help you found, and the faith bonus is backloaded. And the trade route pressure seems useless to me. Completing a trade route gives you like 15% of a missionary. And missionaries are already cheaper for you.

I'm all for making this building more interesting, cuz it's lame, but I don't know if Byzantium needs a straight buff.

 

[azum4roll]

It's not supposed to help you found. It's supposed to help you spread, and take advantage of the Classical Great People purchase.

 

[rkkn]

indeed

 

[Stalker0]

Byz doesn't need a boost imo, she's perfectly fine. That is my experience playing her, and the AI only games reinforce that she is a strong civ. The UB does its job of getting you some solid extra faith and pressure spread, and that's all it needs to.

 

[Rekk]

I don't see any reason to reiterate Ethiopia's UB bonus onto Tetraconch.

 

[adan_eslavo]

I don't see any reason to reiterate Ethiopia's UB bonus onto Tetraconch.

What is it now? Exactly the same?

 

[Rekk]

What is it now? Exactly the same?

Never mind, should have checked the building before posting.

 

[pineappledan]

This doesn’t seem like a good idea.

The tetraconch has a scaling Bonus, and then this yield converter will then scale off of that? It’s daisy chained scaling yields; seems clunky.

Overall the total this will generate is low, because it rounds down. You need 10 per turn in the city to get 1, and you won’t get anything more until you hit 20. It’s entirely possible that between your shrine (2), base tetraconch (3), pantheon (2-3), and pop scaler (1-2), that you will only get +1 when the tetraconch is first built, and maybe nothing at all in secondary cities. You probably won’t get +2 per city until much later. This is a very slow bonus, and the tetraconch already has1 scaling bonus.

Also I haven’t seen any evidence that Byzantium needs a buff in the first place.

 

[stii]

While it isn't as good as the best UB Byz is already pretty good, I don't think the civ overall needs a buff?

 

[adan_eslavo]

This doesn’t seem like a good idea.

The tetraconch has a scaling Bonus, and then this yield converter will then scale off of that? It’s daisy chained scaling yields; seems clunky.

Overall the total this will generate is low, because it rounds down. You need 10 per turn in the city to get 1, and you won’t get anything more until you hit 20. It’s entirely possible that between your shrine (2), base tetraconch (3), pantheon (2-3), and pop scaler (1-2), that you will only get +1 when the tetraconch is first built, and maybe nothing at all in secondary cities. You probably won’t get +2 per city until much later. This is a very slow bonus, and the tetraconch already has1 scaling bonus.

Also I haven’t seen any evidence that Byzantium needs a buff in the first place.

But if the buff is not so big and impactful, and if the building itself looks only slightly underpowered even if civ is quite good, then what's the point of arguing?
Should everything be buffed so much that in next patch it should be nerfed again?

The only downside is that it gets a bit clunky with so many abilities, even more than for a Runestone.

 

[pineappledan]

If mechanics are going to be added to things then they should serve a purpose. I don't see what purpose this serves. It's complicated. It's pretty weak. It doesn't synergize with some other aspect of the kit.

This is the kind of bonus that, if it were on the UB already, I might be campaigning to have removed, because it's bloated fluff that overcomplicates a game component for no discernible reason.

The only downside is that it gets a bit clunky with so many abilities, even more than for a Runestone.

That's.... an extraordinarily good reason not to add something. That's exactly what I'm saying.

 

[azum4roll]

But if the buff is not so big and impactful, and if the building itself looks only slightly underpowered even if civ is quite good, then what's the point of arguing?
Should everything be buffed so much that in next patch it should be nerfed again?

The only downside is that it gets a bit clunky with so many abilities, even more than for a Runestone.

We may as well replace that bonus with +1 flat Culture. It's meaningless as a yield conversion.

 

[Legen]

Overall the total this will generate is low, because it rounds down. You need 10 per turn in the city to get 1, and you won’t get anything more until you hit 20. It’s entirely possible that between your shrine (2), base tetraconch (3), pantheon (2-3), and pop scaler (1-2), that you will only get +1 when the tetraconch is first built, and maybe nothing at all in secondary cities. You probably won’t get +2 per city until much later. This is a very slow bonus, and the tetraconch already has1 scaling bonus.

If mechanics are going to be added to things then they should serve a purpose. I don't see what purpose this serves. It's complicated. It's pretty weak. It doesn't synergize with some other aspect of the kit.

This is the kind of bonus that, if it were on the UB already, I might be campaigning to have removed, because it's bloated fluff that overcomplicates a game component for no discernible reason.

That's.... an extraordinarily good reason not to add something. That's exactly what I'm saying.

We may as well replace that bonus with +1 flat Culture. It's meaningless as a yield conversion.

The proposed yield conversion could be a support for Holy Sites. A Holy Site can easily generate over 10 faith each, and over 20 in the lategame.

That said, it's still a slow effect, given that Holy Sites are not going to be your priority before Renaissance at best.

 

[Stalker0]

If mechanics are going to be added to things then they should serve a purpose.

This statement is very important. Change for change sake is a terrible thing, and it leads to bloat. Simplier is better when it comes to design, so if your going to change something, it should be for a good reason.

When your changing a civ, the normal reasons are:

1) You want to change up the gameplay of the civ, aka make it more interesting.
2) The civ is under/overpowered and needs to have its power adjusted.

This change does neither. Byz is already strong AND interesting, and the UB isn't that weak. It gives extra culture and a good amount of extra faith for a civ really good at converting faith into things like GPP...it does what it needs to do. A civ's balance and gameplay is a combination of all of its elements, and they aren't all equal in every civ (because if they were that would hugely limit the variety of things we could do with a civ). Byz has a very strong UA and a great UU, so it gets a weaker UB....nothing wrong with that.

 

[Rekk]

The proposed yield conversion could be a support for Holy Sites. A Holy Site can easily generate over 10 faith each, and over 20 in the lategame.

That said, it's still a slow effect, given that Holy Sites are not going to be your priority before Renaissance at best.

1-2 extra culture per Holy Site is pretty meaningless past Renaissance.

I agree that this proposal could have just been +1 for all the effect it will have, and it's still the wrong direction because Byzantium doesn't need a buff.

 

[dostillevi]

Balancing doesn't inherently mean that, say, all UBs need to be comparably more powerful than their base buildings. It also needs to consider the overall Civ capability and the strategy using the UBs. Mainly, a Civ can be balanced with a strong UA and a weak UB. Balancing UBs against other UBs or against the buildings they replace doesn't give a full perspective on the impact. I'd like to see that perspective before supporting such changes.

 

[Recursive]

Timestamp post to arrange all the threads in a neat order.